According to Washington Wizards Insider Quinton Mayo, the Washington Wizards are highly interested in acquiring the 4th overall pick from the Sacramento Kings in hopes of drafting guard Jaden Ivey out of Purdue:
Washington’s front office is really high on 6-foot-4 guard, Jaden Ivey out of Purdue. They’ve spent a significant amount of time discussing possible trade packages to acquire the number four overall pick from Sacramento, Ivey’s assumed draft position, sources tell me. Ivey, 20, regularly pulls comparisons to explosive combo guards Ja Morant and Russell Westbrook.
This will likely be the first of many rumors regarding the 4th pick and the Kings, as the top-3 of Chet Holmgren, Paolo Banchero, and Jabari Smith Jr. is all but set heading into next week, and Sacramento may not be interested in taking Jaden Ivey if his skill set is deemed to similar to that of De’Aaron Fox. Any team looking to snag what many consider to be a potential franchise guard will be blowing up Sacramento’s phones over the next few days.
From a trade-fit perspective, the Wizards may standout as an interesting partner for the Kings. With their win-now perspective, the Kings will undoubtedly start any conversations with Bradley Beal, assuming that Monte McNair would be sending additional assets Washington’s way, but there has been no indication over the last several years that the Wizards are willing to move their lone All-Star. If that’s the case, the Kings are in desperate need of help at the forward spot, and Washington happens to have several young options on their roster, namely Deni Avdija, Rui Hachimura, and Corey Kispert, as well as the not-as-young Kyle Kuzma, who the Kings pursued last summer before the Buddy Hield trade fell apart with the Lakers.
Of course, any theoretical deal wouldn’t be made up solely of one or more of the players above, as the Wizards also own the 10th overall pick, which would almost certainly be included as well. Recently, Sacramento has worked out several prospects projected to be drafted in the later lottery range, including forward Jeremy Sochan out of Baylor and guard Dyson Daniels from the G League Ignite, and while those scouting efforts are more due diligence than planning for any specific trade, the Kings should be fully prepared to move back if they so choose.
As is always the case with this time of year, rumors and leaks are mostly fueled by agendas, smoke screens, and agent antics, but that doesn’t mean these things can’t or won’t happen or make them any less fun to discuss or argue. More than anything, these types of reports demonstrate the amount of power the Kings hold heading into the draft next Thursday night.
Beal would be interesting, but two concerns:
Kings would likely need to give up another 1st rounders in deal
He’s an injury waiting to happen, based on his history.
Other than that, no other assets on Wiz gonna make a difference. And Kuzma is so 2018.
What if I told you the Kings would get Bradley Beal and keep the 4th Pick!
Here we go … to mucho blah blah blah season …
Fleetwood MacNair
Whoever is selected, half the fans will be Grateful and the other half will be Dead:
(The upside down photo reveals the tie in, since most of y’all probably wouldn’t know, lol.)
4 for 10, Rui and Deni is a very appealing deal for the kings. You get 2 young 2-way wings and are still in the lottery. Rui is a good fit next to Sabonis
Rui is a bad defender and a bit of a black hole on offense.
Deni is a good defender and passer, but has to improve his 3 to help spread the floor. It can happen, but no sure thing.
I’d take Deni and Kuzma.
This might be a better version of the deal for sure. Kuzma is also a good fit
You’d move down from 4 to 10 for Deni and 1yr rental of Kuzma? (unless your plan is to extend Kuz, which doesn’t interest me at all). Kuzma has said he’s not going to use the player option and will instead hit RFA, just like Sabonis.
I just can’t get excited about Keegan Murray. Maybe it’s the fact half his highlights are against Northern Utah and Northwestern. But I think its more that his play looks like footage from the 70’s. Everything is fundamentally sound, but it’s pretty boring and doesn’t appear very athletic. I’m sure there’s a huge bias there.
The point is, when you give up a gifted scorer and leader like Ivey at #4, the sum of a bunch of role players and another lottery ticket next year just doesn’t add up.
Murray is athletic enough to guard most 3’s and 4’s
he his Fundamentally sound, as great catching shoot, Weakside health shop blocking, great BBIQ excellent finisher and very good catch and shoot percentage from three, cuts well. The only knock on him is he’s a little bit older which is fine for a player that will play the four, and that he does not create super well which isn’t really needed for the type of player he is.
I want nothing to do with that trade. Rui is an OK mid range scorer but not very good at anything else. Is that a difference maker? Deni is likely to be out of the league in a few years.
His 3PA and 3P% has increased every year. Last year he was up to 44.7% on 2.9 3PA/game. I am not arguing that he is some crazy level shooter, just throwing numbers out there.
Yeah, but a bit limited sample size on just half a season, and the reason for Rui being out half a season was never communicated and shrouded in mystery.
The persistent rumours were that he had mental issues. So if the Kings consider adding Rui to a deal, Monte should really do his due diligence.
If you’re dropping from 4 to 10, and only getting Rui and Deni …. that’s a major, major fail.
This!
#4, Harkless, TD, Holiday for #10, Rui, Deni, Kispert and an unconditional 2023 first round pick.
Go Zags!
That would be great, but because of the westbrook deal, they can’t trade a pick until 2028.
Doh, nevermind then. None of their wings and #10 are worth the #4. I’d insist on another pick.
Yeah, that’s where I am, as well.
Yup. 3 unproven role players and the #10 for the #4 pick ain’t gonna cut it.
Yeah that’s a deal breaker right there. None of their wings really gets me excited. I would do #4 for #10, Kispert, Kuzma and a 2023 FRP.
Now that you mentioned that they can’t trade a pick until 2028, its a hard pass.
OT: I believe Murray is the first of the possible top 5 prospects that has been confirmed to have met with the Kings.
https://twitter.com/SeanCunningham/status/1537467441269264384
https://twitter.com/James_HamNBA/status/1537467825073270785
this is good news … about Keegan Murray.
Good news except for a core that mentions Barnes.
Murray remains my favorite target at 4 if one of the top 3 bigs don’t fall. He is just a seamless fit and is still developing his game. If we took Murray, we should look at getting a late pick for more wing help. Love the idea of Ochai on the Kings
If the Kings are staying at #4, I don’t see any way they are acquiring another late first rounder, unless they are moving Barnes. Holmes isn’t going to get it done. Wood was worth #26, so Holmes isn’t going to fetch much.
What about Holmes and #37 for a pick in the 20’s?
I don’t think anyone wants Holmes. What teams need a starting mid-level center with his contract. No one is going to want his deal as a back-up center.
With Dallas getting Wood, I see the Hornets as they only team that would want Holmes, but that would likely mean eating Hayward’s deal.
Holmes, Harkless, TD, and Holiday for Hayward and #15 works, but I’d think the Hornets would want Barnes included.
My dream deal: Holmes and Barnes for Hayward and #13
Draft Murray at #4 and Jalan Williams at #13
I like this. I would take Ochai at 13 but Im with you on the rest
Really interesting how there was there were all these emotions around re-signing Holmes last season, and Monte limiting how much he could pay him based off the moves made during the season, etc. Now he is a player that has little value in the league based on that $12m contract. Things change rather quickly
Holmes salary is not an issue. He is on a team friendly deal.
And the FA center market is relatively deep. Holmes is salary filler in the current market, I believe.
I would trade Holmes, Holiday, and next year‘s lotto protected first for Hayward. With his injury history, I feel much better having him next to Barnes, rather than replacing him.
I’d trade Holmes & Holiday for Hayward, but not a 1st rounder.
That deal would work and Kings a better team . Hornets have to sign Miles . Yes and 😃
yes. Do not give up a first rounder- not in 2023 year (great draft)
Hornets want Miles and can use the Hayward space to accomplish that- let the Kings help out.
the “help out” is take Hayward’s deal + get the #13.
That’s giving up way too much.
What? No, if you’re trading for Hayward you should also be receiving at least a 1st. Not giving one away.
Yes exactly.
That would be a deal breaker and Kings worse . Richie 88 on target .
Sorry, I’m having trouble figuring out what you’re trying to say. Gordon hasn’t played more than 49 games in a season with CHA and is owed $60MM over the next two seasons. Meanwhile they’re going to have to pony up big to keep Bridges. Hayward is currently the classic definition of a guy teams will likely attached assets to in order to unload his contract. The fact that they have two mid-1sts this year makes it even more likely IMO.
You’re having trouble understanding it because it’s so absurd you can’t believe it. Gordon is what you call a bad contract. I’m all for taking on a bad contract in exchange for a nice draft pick or a young prospect.
I’d miss Holmes and Barnes, but I like it.
Co-sign
Holmes and Barnes for Hayward and the 13 pick would be an excellent trade and I can see how it works for both teams in several ways. Barnes is gone after this year so trade him now or likely lose him for nothing. Holmes is a wasted talent on this roster now. Trade him for something you need and want. Like Hayward! Yes Hayward comes with some injury risk that’s higher than the average player but if healthy he actually fits exactly what the kings need and want to do. It’s increasing the talent level (adding another allstar – former) that can have a serious impact on any chance of making the playoffs.
holmes and Barnes fit with the hornets roster needs really well also and it saves them future money to sign some of their young rising stars like Bridges and Ball to long term deals.
the contracts and on court lineup additions fit incredibly well for both teams. At least from an outsiders perspective.
this trade should happen as soon as possible. I honestly don’t see what there is to not like about this deal from a kings fan perspective. Another first round pick plus a fringe allstar for a playoff run (regardless of your opinion on if a playoff run is wise).
makes too much sense. DO IT Monte!!
I would expect Hornets to trade #15 as it’s an acquired 1st rounder, if they trade their own at #13 they can get Stepien-ed in the future.
I don’t expect any trade, but if it did happen…
The market for Holmes is disappearing. At this point, I would take on Hayward’s deal to get 13. (they have 15 as well? )
My dream deal- Holmes , Moe, Holiday for 13 and Hayward.
Cavs are interested in Barnes. That 14th pick was more my target
Barnes to the Cavs for Caris LeVert and the #14.
I’ve been following the Wizards a lot.
Beal wants to go to a contender and he wants to get paid the supermax; preferably both. Beal is not worth the supermax.
If you believe that Fox should expend less effort on defense because he’s so involved offensively, you’d be happy with Beal’s D. If you love winning basketball, you’d be less than thrilled.
If you hated Buddy dribbling the ball off his foot and making mindnumbing TO’s? Beal will drive you nuts, especially in crunch time.
Also, keep in mind that Beal has transitioned from a pure SG with a high clip from 3% to a combo-gaurd who has the ball in his hands a lot and has regressed from 3. His last season with a 3P% higer than .353, is in the 2017-2018 season (.375 3p%). He’ll have to transition back succesfully to a more off-ball outside shooting player to succeed with Fox and Sabonis.
No thanks.
I don’t think the Wizards are looking to trade Beal for the 4th. They seemed to want to pair Ivey with Beal and Porzingis. So any deal would probably be for 10 and a trio of the roles players they have
Lol
Oh, I agree with that.
It is more to sort of forestall Kings fans of getting infatuated with the idea of Beal.
Agreed. I know Beal is a stud, but we would be just repeating the Beal/Wall combo essentially.
Now, I would still probably accept a Beal trade lol
would they throw in Salmons? or help us get Sauce Castillo back.???
those guys are great role players
For a time Beal used to live in my neighborhood in Northern Virginia. One time I was at a stop light a few minutes before 8am on my way to work. Started to smell an overwhelming dank odor with my windows down. Looked in rearview mirror, Brad Beal hitting the blunt hard in his drop top Ferrari on his way to practice. He may be supremely talented, but he doesn’t have the disciplined winner mentality we need.
It’s the week before the draft. This seems like a smokescreen.
Please tell me you were high when you came up with that
😂
Beal will be getting 45 million to not play in 3 seasons .
completely agree.
Let’s go McGenius
Bud Light presents: Real Men of Genius
♫ Reeeal men of geeenius ♫
.
.
Today we salute you, Mr. 4 on 5 Inventor.
♫ Mister 4 on 5 inve-entor ♫
.
.
Never before has anyone who professes to be good at math
come up with an idea that results in bad math.
♫ 4 minus 5 equals negative one ♫
.
.
Sure, you guided your daughter’s elementary school to the championship game with your cunning tactics.
And it will also work
in the National Basketball Association.
♫ Cherry picking is so sweet and tasty ♫
.
.
You surround yourself with people smarter than yourself.
Which, if you think about it,
literally makes you the dumbest guy in the room
♫ and Vlade was pretty darned dumb ♫
.
.
But who can argue against branding something “3.0”
♫ 3.0 is better than 2.0 ♫
.
.
And who could fault you for telling the fans:
this is “their team”?
♫ This sucky team is your team and it sucks catch me at the Warriors game ♫
.
.
Because you know
owning a professional sports team means you get to enjoy watching really good basketball
played by your teams’ opponents
♫ Yes I wore a jacket with a L*kers logo on it California knows how to party ♫
.
.
So crack open an ice cold Bud Light,
oh Sultan of the 2 Seconds Ahead
And keep those brilliant ideas coming
Because if you’re in the lottery every offseason,
you’re playing to win
…the lottery
♫ Mister 4 on 5 inve-entor ♫
.
.
Bud Light Beer
Anheuser-Busch
St. Louis, Missouri
Chug Chug Chug! Pedal to the Meddle!
killed it
This killed me. I forgot about those catchy commercials.
I guess my question is what is the rationale and grounds for doing a deal like this. Hypothetically its splitting the difference of win now and prospect acquisition. Not against that in a vacuum but do question if you can design a return that makes it worthwhile.
If its for some/all of Kispert, Rui and Deni you are essentially trading for prospects. In that case the group hasnt really shown signs of being able to be plus starters at this point. Yes its a lot of darts but they all seem pretty unreliable compared to the upside of #4. Even with 10.
Kuzma being involved with them and the 10th pick starts to have more grounds for the above stated goals. But I don’t see his fit being without flaws next to Sabonis. He has made strides defensively especially on the perimeter but weakside help and size he’s not the best in cover for Domas. Offensively its interesting but still question if its enough. And you have to match salary. I dont want to use holmes in that deal (think you could get some better value removed from this trade). #4, Harkless, Holiday and Len for #10 Kuzma and Deni would work. It still seems a bit thin.
That said I would prefer this than a John Collins deal without draft compensation. I dont think theres a lot of air between him and Kuzma despite a chasm of separation in value to contract. A deal like that would be being made for immediate improvement. That said you likely are attaching Barnes in the deal or at least Holmes and your whole bench. Does that leave you better? Subtract also a lottery pick in the return package and cap constraints I dont see the appeal at all.
Not a Kuzma homer by any means but saw him play against us in Sabonis’ first away game. I know Sabonis is a bit larger on paper but in person, I was SHOCKED at Kuzma’s size. He was actually bigger than Sabonis as a presence on the floor. He has filled out (wouldn’t say he’s overweight, just thicc). And he can really take over games (granted against our porous D).
I have always been a big fan of his game. And I do want to make clear he is a good defender, it’s just the lack of verticality with Sabonis that gets be a little concerned on that end. That said the IQ stuff on offense with Sabonis’s stewardship would not be an adjustment for him. The improvements he made this year along with him entering his prime it’s not unreasonable if he continued to improve.
IDK I guess I just disagree with the premise/rationale of the deal. Or feel it a bit thin when comparing to other trade down possibilities. Granted those are just hypothetically plausible just like this. It has merit to consider.
Granted Kuzma, something and 10 compared to a Grant or Collins deal with no draft compensation and more outbound salary (possibly Barnes) I would much rather this deal.
See above post comment.
Doubt Wiz do that trade. I’m also a bit higher on TD than most folks on this site.
I think there is a significant chance TD out performs his contract next year.
Go back to yesterdays post and look at what I had as a trade idea.
In a year or two Murray is going to be far better than Kuzma.
I don’t think it will take that long.
The question is if he is better then a combo of Kuzma plus the 10th pick and say Deni. And an aside where is Sabonis at this point? A fair question as part of the rationale of the said trade is the fact the Kings pushed their timeline in the trade they made last season.
I don’t necessarily disagree with you. Nor am I actively advocating for the laid out trade above just saying it isn’t simply a comparison of Kuzma and Murray.
how about right now?
I don’t share your certainty.
Me either. I think Presti will take Ivey. Have for at least a week.
I have that same notion. The question is, which of Chet, Jabari, Paolo is there at 4? Or to throw a wrench in the whole thing, what if the Rockets get crazy and take Sharpe…Nothing would really surprise at this point.
Possible but highly unlikely they choose Sharpe over one of the consensus top 3.
They just traded Wood to the Mavs for the anticipation of picking one of Chet, Paolo or Jabari.
Do we know that? It’s all speculation at this point.
Regardless, I would bet Houston wanted Banchero more than OKC and OKC wants Ivey. Just based on their roster and those guys individual strengths/weaknesses.
Agreed. A guy with his size who can average 18-8-4 would look pretty sweet with what Jalen can turn into, and whatever Sengun, KPG, Garuba, and Christopher turn out to be.
Chet. He has shot creation issues for teams that are really bad at shot creation. McNair has always probably been very confident that Holmgren would be there at 4. But at the same time you can’t be played and tip your hand.
if the Kings walk away with Chet at 4 in this draft, that’s a huge, huge get.
Don’t be surprised if it happens.
From your lips to Basketba’al’s ears.
Blasphem’d
If he is there at 4, have the NBA league office on speed dial and make the pick.
I really hope you’re right. Partially because I disagree with this:
In fact, out of the consensus top 4, I expect him to be the second best creator (for himself and others).
So you think Holmgren is a better shot creator than Smith? I’m assuming it’s not Banchero since that’s what he does. I’ve not watched Holmgren much, but what I have seen is that he doesn’t create a ton of shots that isn’t in the open court.
I might be wrong (normal caveats apply), but I don’t see what you’re saying at all.
You haven’t watched Holmgren much but you’re prepared to constantly evaluate him. Got it, great stuff.
Oh. You got me. My bad. I’ll stop opining now oh great opinionater.
But then what else would you do with your life. You’re on this site 24/7.
How original. At least you’re nothing if not consistent.
I haven’t been following this argument, but just wanted to say thanks for sharing that new word “opinionater”. I’m thinking sci-fi, like the Terminator, but with a new up and coming movie star.
Like many arguments it’s polemic at best. But at least most of the back and forths I usually enjoy.
It reminds me of Dr. Doofenschmirtz.
I am not familiar with Doofenschmirtz, but I’ll try to remember, maybe sleep on it. Certainly sounds interesting.
A Phineas and Ferb reference. You’re really Otis, aren’t you?
(I’m kidding.)
This is is true.
You got me right
I’m just curious what makes you believe Holmgren will be such a good shot creator at the NBA level. You could easily be right, wouldn’t be surprised if you are. Just curious why more than anything else.
I think he has a more versatile offensive game, better vision (and of course his size creates passing lanes), he’s highly efficient inside and outside the paint, and he has a deeper bag of ways to get to his shot. Both Ivey and Smith are pretty one-dimensional. They’re very good at that one dimension, but NBA teams are pretty good at taking that type of thing away. Smith isn’t really a shot creator at all, though his ability to hit tough jumpers over contests could be considered a type of creation, I guess.
How much of this impression is actually based on what they did at college?
The reason I ask is quite often players change their profiles some from what they are at the collegiate level to the pro level.
And, I would also point out, that despite my saying otherwise, it wouldn’t shock me in the slightest if Holmgren goes #1 to Orlando. But I also think that’s OKC’s preferred scenario because they almost assuredly would rather have Smith Jr than Holmgren (IMO) due to what each guy does and could do moving forward.
Eh, who knows, much of this is guesswork?
I would bet that, if Ivey goes in the top 3, Paolo would be the one to fall.
If any of the top 3 bigs fall, draft the big that falls.
if a big falls (in the forest) , would the Kings even notice?
I do think Ivey goes in top 3.
Sounds good. Ivey going in the top 3 triggers a few different Kings draft possibilities and they’re all excellent.
That’d be ideal.
I think so too. Ivey is a home run (potentially) and he will pass on Chet or try to trade to 4 to get Chet too.
The various rumored deals are interesting, and I’m not a opposed to a deal, per se, but if Ivey goes higher than four, and one of the bigs is there for Sacramento, he has to be the selection.
And if another team is interested in acquiring said big, then the price of poker will have gone way up.
I wonder if McNair and the FO prefer Murray to Banchero. I doubt that matters, but I’m feeling very idle speculatory atm.
It probably comes down to the same thing we’ve discussed for weeks: Murray is likely the available guy who can have the most-immediate positive impact, but whoever is available at four has a better chance to be a top-level NBA player.
I am confident that Murray will be available at five, less so at six, but it’s conceivable. I have a hard time convincing myself that if we take Murray at four, it won’t be a missed opportunity. If an asset can be acquired to swap down, and still get Murray? That’d be the kind of compromise a lot of us could live with.
The pick is extremely valuable, and I won’t be convinced that a deal to move it would be the right one unless we get an equally valuable asset in return. I wouldn’t rule out Murray as a possible ROY candidate, but the most recent Sacramento ROY didn’t turn out to be the best player in his class, with several players selected after Evans ultimately having better careers.
There is almost certainly not a Steph Curry in this class, which is by no means an insult. The question is whether any of the consensus top players available at four could be special or not. I believe that each has that potential. That’s my concern about taking Murray instead of Ivey, Smith, Banchero, or Holmgren.
I have zero doubt that McNair loves the kind of player that Murray is, if his previous picks are any indication. Is that enough for him to pass on any of the guys mentioned above? My take is that everything that happens next week is entirely dependent on this question, and that any deals that happen or don’t happen will hinge upon it.
My question is how much McNair loves Murray, not whether he does. A subtle distinction to be sure, but an important one.
Maybe Banchero but especially Ivey. I just doubt it ends up being the issue.
If it comes down to Ivey or Murray, I’d agree. But I think Holmgren’s real question marks drop him out of the top 3 regardless of the narrative today, June 16th 2022 AD, that says he’s an auto lock for a top 2 pick. I can see Houston trading their pick if Smith or Banchero aren’t there.
It’ll be an interesting week.
That’s an interesting wrinkle if Holmgren is there at three, and the Rockets want to make a trade, there won’t be any shortage of interested parties.
On the other hand, you put Ivey in with the current Houston roster, and a crazy-athletic roster gets even crazier. I don’t know if they’d pass it up, but it would depend on what offers they get for the pick, same as here.
I like the other bigs better, but if Holmgren is there at four, I don’t think you can pass on him, barring any very attractive trade offers.
I would be pretty surprised if the Kings passed on Holmgren. More than Ivey and Banchero combined, that is.
I highly doubt they dislike Ivey or Banchero for that matter. The issue is what he really brings to the table if you take him. With Davion, you could argue on ball defense. Plus he was taken with the 1:9 and that calculus is very different than the 1:4.
It wouldn’t surprise me if a number of FOs consider Banchero, Ivey and Holmgren on the same tier. It especially wouldn’t surprise me if that includes OKC.
Sam Presti throws monkey wrenches into the mix. Did it with Westy in 08 at the 1:4, the bearded fat boy Harden at 1:3 in 2009, and did it last year with Giddey at the 1:6. Jaden Ivey fits into those lines perfectly.
But McNair knows better to assume (as I’ve said already). You know it Sims, so do I. If I’m being honest, I’d have no trouble laying down a C Note on whether Holmgren ends up at 4. It’s just the public narrative can’t read Presti despite a 15 year body of work (which I think is bullshit but that’s conspiracy theory’ish), and McNair is impossible to read as he can go in so many directions here. In alot of ways, it’s a fascinating chess match. The rumors alone illustrate agents aren’t sure of the direction this draft, yet, IMO.
As always we’ll see. Normal caveats apply. Yadda yadda yadda.
The only way I see McNair seriously pursuing the #2 pick is if Smith is on the board when it’s called. If Smith goes first, then whoever is eventually available at four will still be an extremely valuable asset, whether on the roster, or in a trade.
Yep, I’d agree the only player I’d trade up for is Smith Jr. And it depends on what I’m really giving up.
yes. Houston wants Smith or Banchero- less interested in Chet or Ivey.
What usually happens is that players go in rough order of talent and potential, Teams just trade a round to make that happen.
The top 4 go top 4. The teams picking might change
I think that the Kings at #4 would want to take one of the 3 or Murray but trade down so as to get more assets but still take Murray.
I would.
All of these trade scenarios thrown out there remind me of the 2009 draft when the Wizards traded the #5 pick for Randy Foye and Mike Miller.
Just pick BPA, don’t overthink it. Role players who won’t make a difference if you don’t have a true star.
Thank you. Crappy, perennial 30 win loser teams do stupid shit like wonder about what role players they can put next to their “star” players.
Well, that all depends on perspective. For example, I don’t see a “true star” available at 4 if the top bigs are off the board
I don’t think there’s any way to do a worthwhile trade w/the Wizards.
“Sacramento may not be interested in taking Jaden Ivey if his skill set is deemed to similar to that of De’Aaron Fox.”
Fox is not a dominant player such that you would pass on taking a player like Ivey if you thought he has superstar talent.
Only one GM in a million would be that stupid.
Exactly. It astounds me why some posters here are still talking about “fit” with Fox while holding a high draft pick. I guess memories are short with some around here.
Of course, Doncic isn’t on the board.
Even so, once Fox can get the Kings to a playoff showing, then we can start talking about fit. Until then, he should be viewed as an asset who can be moved for something better. Fox has no track record to be talked about in terms of fit.
Agreed, but since I don’t see Ivey as BPA at that slot anyway, the fact that he’s a poor fit makes the idea of Ivey even worse.
He may not be the BPA but he’s not a poor fit, You can’t possibly evaluate that yet. Come on.
Based on his present skillset, Fox’s present skillset, and the team mix of skills I believe to be important to winning in the NBA, I believe he is a poor fit. Perhaps he’ll develop into a different player in the future with skills presently not in evidence, at which point he may be a better fit. But at the moment, with the information I have, I don’t believe a team featuring Fox and Ivey is likely to be successful.
Yup. I’m in this camp as well. If Monte feels Ivey is the clear BPA and future star, then draft him, but he’d also better have a plan to move on from Fox in the near future.
It sort of reminds me of Monta Ellis and Steph Curry sharing a backcourt in Golden State. Only one was still around when they started winning.
Oh Geez where do I start with that one.
Go for it.
Let’s see it all goes back to the ridiculous discussions if Curry was a one or a two a virtual meaningless distinction. On and on they went. So how would Monte not be a fit with Curry. Is Jordan Poole a fit with Curry. It was even said the KD might not be a FIT with Curry. How did that work out. Are multiple players that can both handle the ball and shoot somehow not a fit. There’s absolutely no evidence Monte and Curry would not have been successful together and if they weren’t it wasn’t because of fit. Lastly do you remember the fit discussions regarding Fox and Doncic who apparently Vlade thought were not a fit. You think the Kings would like to see if they could coexist now. Good/great players always find a way to fit.
LOL, then why did G.S. trade Monta for an injured Bogut? Was Bogut the better player, or was it because of fit?
Uhhh….
This is your butt-pulled idea. K.D. fit like a gem and was why the Warriors let Barnes walk for nothing to Dallas.
Lastly, I don’t remember the fit “discussions” regarding Luka with Fox, BECAUSE 99.9% OF THIS WEBSITE WANTED LUKA! There were no discussion other than the rumored ones in Vlade’s head. Luka was the clear BPA and everyone knew it.
Ivey is like Luka in the way that Keegan Murray is like Tim Duncan. Nonsense.
Fox and Ivey may not bring success to the Kings but it’s not because of fit. It will be because they simply aren’t good enough. This fit stuff I keep reading drives almost as crazy when I kept hearing the word mentoring after the Kings mistakenly signed Hill to a bloated contract. I expect this crap from others but you’re too knowledgeable to buy into that hogwash.
A team, as a whole, in order to be successful, needs to be able to do a number of things. Shoot, facilitate, rebound, defend, etc. Featuring two on-ball guards that don’t provide spacing (which each of them need to succeed), aren’t great facilitators, and don’t defend well is fine. It just puts A LOT of pressure on the other positions to provide those skills. And finding those skills at a high level at other positions isn’t especially easy to do. Is it possible? Sure. Which is why I said that team isn’t likely to be successful. But it’s going to take just the right mix of other players (otherwise known as “fit”).
For example, I think a team trotting out Fox, Ivey, Barnes, Sabonis, and Holmes (considering their present displayed skillsets) is going to pretty darned easy to shut down. And even easier to score on.
FIt only comes in if there is no real clear BPA at #4. If Monte has Ivey, Murray, or someone like Sharpe all relatively on the same tier, then you consider fit.
When it came to Luka, he was BPA by a country mile by most everyone on this site and on the rest of the planet. The two situations are not that similar.
I think if you go back and look, there was a ton of takes that essentially was:”How the fuck can you claim you’re a professional FO and pass up on Doncic?”
My thought at the time was the FO lacked imagination. Still feel that way. And it wasn’t just Doncic or Mitchell they missed out on, either. Bam Adebayo, Jarrett Allen and Kyle Kuzma (the latter two available at 15 and 20) weren’t taken in 2017. The Kings passed on Jaren Jackson Jr, Trae Young, Mikal Bridges, Shai Gilgeous-Alexander to name a few in 2018.
Vlade Divac and his FO had a ridiculously horrible feel for talent. And it shows why the Kings are at where they’re at in 2022.
Agreed. Vlade just 100% sucked at his job, and that is about it.
Honestly, I think the fit/BPA conversation has become painfully oversimplified. Often times exactly who the BPA is depends heavily on their fit. Because fit often determines opportunity and success due to roster construction, system/style, team culture, etc. A player who is the BPA for one team may not be for another. Much less who is likely to be the BP after a season or three. Now, obviously when you’re talking about generational prospects (LeBron, Doncic, etc.) you throw that out the window, but in the vast majority of cases the “BPA” isn’t clear, or shifts drastically over the course of even just the first few years of a player’s development.
It’s all about this part:
Personally, I don’t think he does, so the fit matters.
I agree with this sentiment, but in this situation I am compromising my own opinion in part from the Kings actions. I said this winter I would trade everyone else on the roster but Tyrese Haliburton. Clearly the Kings did not agree with that sentiment.
I could care less about the streak but retaining Sabonis is a different factor considering the expense for the opportunity. And that was made in part in association with Fox, who despite my criticisms is more valuable to the Kings than he is on the market it seems. Maximizing the runway before Sabonis’s FA becomes paramount. And this is the best asset the Kings will have to leverage improving before then. It’s under that haze I am open to trading the pick and less so clashes in style at least for myself. Can the asset be partitioned into a sum greater then a single player.
Personally if I was to guess I think this is all fodder. I think the Kings draft Ivey which is more than reasonable.
Watching Jalen Brown in these finals reminded me a lot of Fox: too much one on one and a lot of stupid turnovers. I wish we could trade Fox for Brown and then just draft Ivey
Paraphrasing, but this is what I’m reading: Brown sucks in the same way that Fox sucks, so let’s trade Fox for Brown.
This is a trade that I would do, mainly out of positional need. A player like Fox might have been of real benefit to Boston in the finals.
WAS has nothing to offer that I’d be interested in.
Yeah, that’s pretty much where I am. I’m interested in Avdija and Todd (as a throw in), but that isn’t nearly enough for me to give up #4.
You don’t think Kuzma could be had at the right price. He’s a pretty darn good player.
Ehhhh… I’m gonna go ahead and agree to disagree. He’s a good rebounder and decent passer, but he’s a below average defender and really inefficient scorer.
Unless they were able to move up to 6 or 7
Washington’s GM thought Vlade still is the GM because I see him taking that.
Vlade’s Razor: Middling players are not going to make this team better.
If you’re not trading #4 for an All Star or near All Star in his early prime, just draft the best player at #4.
As if the man had ever been anywhere near a razor.
The name is wonderfully ironic. Also likely never been near a clothes iron.
He is rather the rumpled dumbass.
That’s a great pub name. REGISTERED TRADEMARK PENDING.
I threw out a deal with the Wizards last month. There’s a hundred of these hypotheticals going around. The Kings need to keep everyone thinking they want IVey and hopefully attract a bidding war. With that said a pick swap plus Holmes, Holiday and Barnes for Kuzma, Hachimura and a future protected first round. We basically pick Hachimura and a future first for dropping six picks now. Barnes and Kuzma are a one year wash.
DC’s roster doesn’t generate a ton of excitement for me, particularly as the players relate to improving the Kings. If a player swap is to be done after each team has selected, I would be absolutely insistent on getting the Wiz pick for ’22-23, with as few protections as possible.
If they want to jump to four, with their players in particular, the cost must be steep.
That’s a reasonable reply but Washington would be one of the few suitors where a trade makes some sense. Again, I’m into how the Kings manage that pick for multiple assets rather than evaluating these draft prospects many of which none of us have seen with any regularity.
I was with you on this until I learned the Wiz don’t have a pick to trade until 2028. All of their picks are promised to OKC with protections until 2026, which is its latest possible conveyance. It’s sort of like the Vlade trade with Philly. Their pick trading hands are tied.
Sucks to be them, I guess.
How often does a Kings fan get to say that?
There was this one time in band camp…… before that was a popular joke.
I could be wrong but I thought the Wizards had their 2023 first rounder conveyed to Houston with protections and the from 2024 on they had their first round picks.
Here are the protections on their 2023 pick:
Because the protections go until 2026, they cannot freely trade a pick until 2028. Stepien Rule in full effect.
Stephen Rule applies to future picks. Not picks already made. Wiz could have their pick in ’23, select a player and then trade those rights. Happens all the time.
True, but they can’t trade the FUTURE picks until the restrictions of of their promised restrictions are conveyed. That means as of today, or even on draft day, they can’t trade a future pick unless it is 2028.
I’m only referring to this in a possible scenario if the Kings wanted to trade their #4 for a Wiz package of their #10, players and a future pick.
Right. The Stepien Rule is important when discussing the Wizards trade packages. I still think the best packages for #4 are from San Antonio and OKC. Whether or not either would be willing to do what it takes to get to #4 is another matter, but that’s just the way that cookie crumbles.
The Kings are the dumbest team in pro sports. Nobody wants to play there. I fully expect them to trade away the 4th pick and a potential all-star (who could dominate and finish games, unlike let’s see … everyone on the current Kings team) for absolutely nothing. Or excuse me, a bunch of crap pieces nobody wants that will help us miss playoffs for next 5 years.
When you have the 4th pick and there’s a potential all-star left, you take the all-star. Did you not learn your lesson from Luka about choosing based on “fit”? Duh. You always pick the best player. Keegan Murray got dominated by the Richmond Spiders in round one of tourney — way early exit. His ceiling is Harrison Barnes, and we already have one of him. Go ahead and give away the next Morant or Mitchell. It’s the Kings way.
This is completely insane.
Beal is hurt often and over the hill- like Webber for Richmond. so no on that
and Kispert, Kuzma, Rui and Deni- below average- all of them. For the #4 pick???????
If Monte decides against Ivey (which I think is a mistake) then there are other trade partners with much better options- Detroit, Indiana, OKC all interested
However, if trade past Detroit, lose the opportunity for Keegan Murray as well.
VR wants play-in next year (and then that’s a loss and no playoffs)
no team is going to trade the Kings a top 15 or 20 player
for the #4 pick and many of those would not get the Kings to the play offs. Get real.
Take Ivey or pull a Bagley vs. Luka and take Murray or do even worse and trade down for a bunch of zeros. I am being sarcastic here and I despair.
The problem is, other than Beal, do they have anyone we’d want that compensates us for giving up #4?
Badge Legend